click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
when a candidate gets defensive that is when they started looking bad. that happens with barack obama. it happened when he told she was like have likable enough. it happened with mitt romney when he did the $10,000 bet with governor perry. it's very important that governor romney keeps making the case about the economy and keep pushing an alternative vision that the american people can see as a better path and a better way forward to improving the economic conditions. if he does that he will put the president on the defensive. if he allows the president to sort divide the audience, talk about women and myth of the war on women and talk about the middle-class and divide the country and gets on the defensive or talk about issues that are irrelevant to the economy, then that is place where governor rom can look at defensive and may not look as good to the audience. >> is it possible to be too prepared for the debate and candidate appears to be reading off a card imprinted in the back of his head because people are pounding him with information? speak to how you go out and relax and have
over this pro-israel ad that was created by the american freedom defense initiative. now it referred to the enemies of israel as, quote, savages and appeared last week around new york. where's the president while first amendment rights are coming under fire? he's out there campaigning of course. joining us alexis ma gill johnson and tucker carlson. tucker, president all this week, "i'm so sorry," at the u.n. "i'm so sorry." some movie trailer came out, it's wrong, it's disgusting. he did it, hillary did it, susanries did it, jay carney did it. why are they pandering this way? right here in america we have a group in dearborn that's trying to stop freedom of speech. where's the president on this in. >> because the left, contrary to popular opinion, is not the defender of free speech. you know, anytime you hear a person use the term "hate speech" you are listening to an attack on the first amendment, because you're hearing an argument that says there are things that says there are things so far out of the mainstream that they ought to be banned. slate, the online liberal magazine this
? >> well, wolf, defense secretary panetta a little bit unexpectedly getting right into the latest intelligence, what he knows and what he doesn't know about syria's chemical weapons. a top syrian opposition group claims it captured these missiles in damascus and said they had been adapted to carry chemical and biological warheads. cnn cannot independently confirm the claim. but now a new admission from defense secretary leon panetta. syria's chemical weapons have been on the move. and he's not sure what exactly has happened. >> there has been intelligence that there have been some moves that have taken place. where exactly that's taken place, we don't know. >> reporter: panetta insists that bashar al assad's forces still control the major chemical and biological sites, but there are security concerns. >> there has been some intelligence that with regards to some of these sites that there's been some movement in order to -- for the syrians to better secure what they -- the chemicals. >> reporter: rebels clearly are making a public play that they can get to the weapons. on this vide
that i am comfortable that the secretary of state, the secretary of defense, the fbi, promptly launched a thorough and searching investigation on the ground in benghazi to learn exactly what happened and what was a chaotic and confusing situation. and i am confident that we continue to have a leadership role in the world as the president laid out today in front of the united nations, rooted in american values, but that will not louis lambist jihadist terrorists to push us out of the region. >> so when you say you're confident in what is happening on the ground, let me put the question directly to you, then. why is that when cnn was in the consulate days after the horrible attack, they found that the -- the diary of ambassador stevens' thoughts and his fears. and not the u.s. investigators. why weren't they the ones who found something like that, which was -- was just lying there? >> that's an excellent question. we did not get briefed on the specifics of cnn's acquisition and use of the private diary of ambassador stevens. that wasn't one of the topics on which we were briefed. that doe
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)